Michael Odell is the 37,563 most popular person on Badoo. Or at least he was when the June edition of Esquire magazine went to press. Michael is a journalist and a friend of mine. In an article in Esquire he explored the ‘future of phone sex’ through geo social apps. It’s a very funny piece and well worth reading. I can’t link to it at the moment as it’s not available online.

From a digital brand strategy point of view the most interesting part was where the marketing director of Badoo, Jessica Powell, was quoted as follows:

According to news reports, this derelict building, and its surrounding area, are going to be transformed into a “multimillion-pound enterprise zone” which will “lure creative, digital, design companies with a tax break and super-fast broadband.” You can find out more if you click the photo, or via this link to the BBC story here.

Now while this is undeniably a good thing, I remain consistently baffled by the government (local and national) belief that if they say ‘creative’, and ‘design’ and most importantly ‘digital’ on a regular basis, then that will be enough to guarantee success and drive us out of recession. I’m baffled not because I don’t believe in those businesses - after all, I’m a director of one, Goram & Vincent, which is all three. But what this seems to ignore, in my view, is that in order to succeed, businesses like ours need clients - businesses and brands -  to be creative ‘on’. We need, to list some of our current ones - cider manufacturers, skateboard importers, adventure companies - who want to partner with us, and pay us money for our creativity, design and digital expertise. Without those clients - we don’t exist.

So rather than desperately imagining a future where creative, design and digital hipsters (so cool that they can grow beards of which local legend W G Grace would have been proud, and are making so much money that they don’t need shoes) - perhaps the government (and the media) would be better off trying to attract businesses that make actually stuff for people to buy, or provide really dull but essential and profitable services? Then, we bearded and shoeless, creative, design and digital types can sidle up to them in a coffee shop and offer to help them with that stuff they’re making or the dull but essential service that people need. It’s not as sexy, and doesn’t sound as exciting, but it might, ultimately, be a more profitable approach.

Fancy meeting you here!

Over the last few days I have been interviewing young men and women about skateboarding and BMX. Leaving aside their use of the phrase ‘back in the day’ when they are 18 years old, and that the day in question must therefore be only about a week ago, it’s been an interesting and invigorating experience. So much so, that when, in the interests of the research, I’ve been reading various ‘action sports’ blogs, a thought has slowly freewheeled into the neglected, cracked concrete skate park in my mind. That thought has been - maybe I could do that again? Maybe I’m not too, er, old?

Now I’m not that old a dog. I can learn new tricks. In recent years I’ve got back into cross country and downhill mountain biking. I’ve learnt to canoe, and completed the 125 mile Devizes to Westminster canoe marathon. But I’ve decided against the skateboarding and the BMX. Why? Two reasons, both based on experience - one is a quick risk vs reward analysis, and the other is simply, no thanks, I just don’t want to.

Take surfing. I have no issue with surfing. It looks amazing. I’m absolutely certain that I would be squarely awful at it, but that’s never stopped me thoroughly enjoying other sports over the years like cricket. I’m pretty rubbish at that - but love the playing and taking part, the drinking and talking, the watching and sharing opinions and media of each. No, the only reason I mention surfing is that there is a scene in the movie ‘Point Break’ which should be used by anyone in a discussion about a sport that they absolutely must try, right now, and not be scared about being hurt or humiliated. This is the Point Break beach dude defence.

‘Point Break’ is brilliant. Patrick Swayze’s hair is so amazing it should have won an Oscar. Gary Busey smokes a look of loud shirts and cigars at all times. Keanu Reeves smiles - it is a fact, movie fans, that he used to do smiling before The Matrix. It  features lots of surfing. It makes it look amazing - which is probably because surfing is amazing (see previous amazingness reference). But even in the midst of this gnarly awesomeness, there is one scene which shows that you, yes you there, can resist the opportunity for aquatic humiliation and retain your coolness. You can do this by being the man on the beach with the beer, leather trousers and lighter fluid. Here he is….

and here is the scene in question. For ideal get the full party purposes, watch it from about 37 minutes here at Point Break

Then, the next time you find yourself in the equivalent situation - everyone else running for the ocean, everyone else saying ‘You MUST do this! It’s great’ and the subtext appears to be that there is something wrong with you if you don’t like, or more importantly even want to try surfing / going to Glastonbury / Zumba / Crack cocaine - employ the Point Break beach dude defence. Here’s how I did it recently..

Chris: You should do this (insert hard, youthful, vigorous task / sport here)

Me: No thanks

Chris: Why? It’s cool.

Me: No.

Chris: It’ll be great!  Have another beer, fill in your bank details and you’ll be base jumping with us next weekend. Awesome.

Me: No, it’s more like, I know what you want me to do looks amazing and all that. I’m sure it’s brilliant. But I’m going to be shit at it. In a women and children first to laugh at me kind of way. Like I was at surfing, and wake boarding, and all those other fun things. So, listen up for a second… you know that film Point Break? Where everyone else runs into the sea in the middle of the night and that bloke just stays on the beach, sits by the fire and has a beer? That’s me. I’m happy on the beach. With a beer.

Chris: What the fuck are you talking about? You’ve got a beer now.

Me: Exactly!

Chris: Just give me your bank details.

Ok, so in the clip, the dude on the beach observes no fire safety guidelines. No Ray Mearsian whittling or rubbing of sticks for him - just pour in that lighter fluid! This is very dangerous, especially for a man with so much exposed chest hair.  He also then spits beer into the fire which seems a. wasteful b. counter productive to his lighter fluid activity. But he appears happy. To be not surfing. To be beachifying. Drinking and wearing leather-ifying. He seems at ease with his sandy, hairy self. If I were there now, if there were a way that I could step into Point Break (and surely that’ll be available soon on the i-phone 5?) I wouldn’t be struggling into a wetsuit, but rather I’d be settling down by the campfire, grabbing a beer, and probably giving the dude a disapproving look the next time he spat into the flames - “Dude, they’ll be out there for hours talking about karmic bollocks, stop wasting the beer!’

The sub, plain, meta text being - it’s OK to say no to stuff. It’s OK to not like stuff. To just not fancy it much. White Lines? Don’t do it! Surfing? Don’t do it? Crochet? Don’t do it!

It’s not often a bus shelter makes the news. When they do, it’s usually because it’s been the scene of some appalling incident - a murder, assault, or the decoupling of teenagers whose jaws have become locked due to over vigorous snogging. But today, in Bristol, bus stops have stopped the press, and made the news. For we now have 40 artistic shelters that the local  bus operator hopes we will VISIT and as reported online

“They want the public to post pictures of themselves at the bus stops – some of which have spaces to put your face – on a specially designed Facebook page. If they do they could win an iPad2, as part of a marketing gimmick to promote the ten new showcase bus routes.”

Though easy targets for Friday afternoon outrage and satire, let’s leave aside the ‘oh gawd not another i-pad prize comp’ or the incredible lunacy that anyone might do a tour of bus stops. What is more interesting, from a design and brand point of view is the attitude toward the use of art and creativity in public spaces and utilities. As the news story goes on to say “Bristol’s head of transport Councillor Tim Kent defended the shelters. He said: “We’ve done an £80 million infrastructure project, and we’re spending £40,000 on showcasing that. They look really good, it makes the shelters more attractive.”

Does this mean that art, creativity, and design were not integral to the £80 million pound project, but rather were to be used as a £40k ‘add on’ for PR and marketing purposes? It certainly sounds like it. Which is in stark contrast to one of the least well known, but utterly brilliant and inspiring ‘clients’ of the last century - Frank Pick.

The biography of Pick on the Design Museum website is worth reading for anyone involved in the design and creative industries, or more importantly, for anyone involved in the commissioning of design in the public sphere. From posters to upholstery to maps and signage, Pick commissioned artists and designers such as Graham Sutherland, Man Ray, Marion Dorn, Norbert Dutton, Enid Marx, and Paul Nash to produce work for London Transport. All of which led the architectural historian Nikolaus Pevsner to describe Pick in 1942 as “the greatest patron of the arts whom this century has so far produced in England and indeed the ideal patron of our age.”

Why? Why did Pick and his team do this? Why the concentration and focus on using designers and artists to work on the very fabric of their product? The answer can be found in what today would be called their ‘mission statement’, but in 1938 was known by the more humble title of their  ‘undertaking’ which was

‘A declaration of faith by the Board that its task is worthwhile, that’s its labours shall eventually contribute their appointed share to the transformation of urban civilisation into some fine flower of accomplishment’

There is an ambition and humility to that statement that is in marked contrast to the idea that people might be so excited by their new bus stop that they post photos to facebook in an attempt to win a piece of electronic goods. It is a statement of bold intent that understands that their success would lie not in asking their travellers to be thankful for having art and creativity woven into their use of public transport. It is a statement that reveals an awareness that this was the London Public Transport Board ‘reason to be’. It was what they did, and what their public deserved. Over sixty years on from that ‘undertaking’ and it is still what the public deserve. Unfortunately our public servants now view design and art to be something thrown in as a PR gimmick rather than integral to the ‘transformation of urban civilisation’. Which is a shame.

‘Evolution not revolution’

This has become one of those things that people in sport say. Like not looking ahead (to promotion, the cup final, the world cup) but taking each game as it comes. Or not being interested in records, statistics, medals - it’s all about the performance.

All of which are utter balls.

The last is rubbish because at a professional level it is your job to win. Winning means being the best. So records, statistics and medals are the very measure of your success or failure. You have to be interested in them or either you’re not interested in winning or you’ve got no appreciation of history, no imagination with which to dream of supreme performance and the resulting success. It’s the same with taking each game as it comes. This is something that is forced on us all by the time / space continuum - the necessity of our lives moving forward in time with no opportunity to leap into the future. Except our minds can - and surely do, even if you are a professional sportsman. If I do play well, and I shoot , I hit a six, I dive into the corner for a try  then OMFG we will win and we will be champions of the WORLD and all earthly delights and prizes will be mine. All MINE.

Evolution not revolution is also balls. It’s said to communicate two things. The first objective of its utterance is to dampen expectation that the new benefactor is going to start waving over-sized charity ‘grab and grin’ cheques at every player that the fans had ever wished was appearing for their club and not the opposition. The second objective is to make it very clear that the club is going to be run prudently. That there will be long term plans. The training ground will be improved. A new chef, Gustave, will be replacing Mavis in the kitchens. Stretching will be compulsory before the start of all activity, even executive meetings. Through Darwinian evolution, and in particular the principle of natural selection, the club will  ”preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations…” and gain “a functional advantage that enables a species to compete better in the wild” or in the case of sport, to compete better in the league, or at the very least generate a decent cup run.

At no point - let us make this very clear - will we do anything REVOLUTIONARY. This is not a violent overthrow of everything that went before. Blood will not be spilt. Heads will not roll. Boats will not be rocked. Neither the Winter Palace or the Bastille will be stormed.

All nonsense. For most professional sports club exist in a state of near constant revolution. Owners change. Managers are sacked. Previously successful players are made to train with the reserves as a punishment for gargantuan gambling, drug, or sex addictions. Gustave may produce exquisite linguine, and the new GPS and plastic cone training aids may make five a side more fun, but unless the team wins on a regular basis, you won’t have to wait long for another revolution. Yes, yes, Manchester United are an amazing example of how having a consistency of senior management personnel can bring forth repeated success - but that has not been without yearly revolutions, some minor, some major, on the playing staff. In fact one could go so far as to say that a little violent revolution is an essential ingredient for sporting success. The thinking being that if every club adopted a purely evolutionary approach, they would each improve, become better, more efficient, until they all achieved perfection as a species designed to train, feed, massage and produce winning sports teams. But someone has to lose don’t they? Someone has to play badly despite their evolution into sporting supreme beings. This is where revolution comes in. Revolution means immediate change. If it’s broke - fix it. So perhaps if my club’s new majority shareholder was being completely honest, he could have said:

“I could promise you evolution not revolution. But I won’t because that’s balls. As Charles Darwin said ‘Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps.’ Now I know that those slow steps will take far too long. Sorry to use a quote again, but I’m a man of advanced years who made his money in finance, and as John Maynard Keynes said ‘In the long run we are all dead.’ I’d like to see some success for this club before I die. No doubt you would too. So I’m going to use my money to do all the evolutionary things such as hire a new chef called Gustave and buy some new training bibs and cones. But I’m also going to do some revolutionary things too. We’re going to move to a new stadium. That’s pretty radical. I’m going to sell some of those old players as well - even the ones you like. I’m going to appoint a new manager, and if he (or she) doesn’t work out, then I’ll fire them and get someone else. Basically I’m going to keep being a revolutionary until we have some success. Ok with you? Evolution? Yes. But with some revolution too.”

Fine by me. See you at the barricades.

“Bio this, techno that, ion whatever… blah blah blahhdy blah blah. Honestly who buys that crap? If you’re someone that does, go back to our home page, have another read, then give yourself an uppercut – you shouldn’t still be on our site, you don’t belong here and you’ve been told. Now bugger off.”

Now I love a bit of aggressive, non-conformist copy. I love the way that Brewdog talk about themselves, and denigrate the mainstream competition.

No, my issue with Linebreak is that if you are going to write copy that says….”We’re damn good at what we do, which is developing and making the stuff. What we’re not great at is marketing (and we’re kinda proud of that). We’ve played the game, we got sucked in. Sucked in to thinking we needed the slickest marketing….”

Then you shouldn’t let the multinational marketing agency that probably wrote it for you have a little graphic at the bottom of the page which tells you that they did.

Kind of undermines the brand positioning somewhat.

Click on the illustration by my project partner Tobey Brown to read it. Thanks to Rowena Roberts for editing support and help.

To find out more about 26 Stories of Christmas, click here.

People generally don’t like that. Ho hum. Anyway, here it is.

Dear XXXX,

Your brand made its mark on me at an early age. On the back of my head to be precise. I was overexcited and showing off to my brother Tom when I jumped off a flight of stairs and landed on my head. I was in hospital for days. My Mother says I nearly died. So it was a memorable visit for her.

Another one of my memories is of Tom (him again) being bitten by a goose. Happy days.

Anyway, you’ve asked for a creative idea, not the story of my life. You want more people to donate more money. You’re concerned that many people aren’t aware of your charity status, nor are they aware of how they can make a difference around the world. So you’re in the market for a campaign idea that will deliver a good ROI in the form of donations.

Well, maybe because I landed on my head all those years ago, I’m going to ask – are you sure? Do you really need a campaign idea? The reason I ask is because there is a tendency in our agency world to assume that the techniques used to sell cider, fitness or expensive holidays (to name three that we’re currently working on) can also be used to recruit supporters and donations for charities. That if we’re creative enough, then the effectiveness will take care of itself.

But it doesn’t does it?

Far too often, when it comes to charity, advertising, digital and media people want to be creative rather than focus on what actually works. So a big campaign with a whizzy creative idea might raise awareness, gain you ‘likes’ or ‘fans’, but will it deliver engagement and involvement? Let’s go back to those objectives.

More people to donate money?

We believe that your focus should be digital storytelling and experiential philanthropy. At present, you want people to donate to help with your work, your projects. What people want is to be involved in projects, to be part of something, to contribute and share the story. Put simply, I don’t want to give £50 to an organisation with no idea of how that money will be spent except that it is ‘for a good cause’. It’s not what you do. It’s what you’re actually doing. I want to give £50 and become part of what you do. I want compelling visual updates that I can share. I want to know when things go wrong, because a story without some drama or conflict isn’t going to hold my attention. I want photos, video, blog updates. So don’t bury these projects in pdf’s on a static webpage. Make them dynamic, exciting and prominent.Give people options of which project to support, tailor which you offer based on what you know about the individual. Tailor the way that you talk about each project. Tailoring delivers ROI.

You’re concerned that many people aren’t aware of your charity status.

When was the last time you avoided a chugger? I did it today. That’s the problem isn’t it? Charities are everywhere these days. It isn’t really the differentiator of old. No sooner has Children in Need finished than Comic Relief is here and we’re all sitting in bathtubs of baked beans. Sadly, people are increasingly suspicious and wary of charities. Why? Well, it may be something to do with the fact that you can’t pop out for a packet of crisps anymore without a hyperactive drama student on an hourly rate trying to get your bank details. So the fact that you are a charity is a wonderful reassurance and confirmation of the good work that you do. But it’s the work itself that will drive engagement and involvement.

Make people aware of how you can make around the world.

See above - digital and direct marketing storytelling encouraging experiential philanthropy. The future of giving is project based – so make more of those projects by getting people to join you in making them happen. Don’t ask them for money – ask them for their help, their time and attention. Do this by tailoring the content – focus on projects that you feel that they will want to support and then allow them to give in a way that works for them. Make it a rewarding experience, and the money will come too.

So how could we help? Well, we’ve got lots of experience of helping brands connect and engage with their consumers. We do this through rigorous analysis and focus on matching brand objectives with the dreams, hopes, aspirations and desires of the consumer.

We believe that we could energise the fundraising for you by bringing this rigour to bear on how and where you communicate your projects. So that the right people get the right message about the right project in the right media. All of which ‘rightness’ will make them want to be involved – financially and emotionally.

In terms of next steps we would advocate meeting up. Taking this conversation further. Give the subject a good going over. It would be fun. Right now, I’ve got to take my daughters to where I hit my head – and try and make sure that they don’t jump off any stairs or get bitten by a goose.

Hope to speak soon.

Pete

Click on the slide and it’ll take you to the presentation uploaded to Slideshare. I’ve posted up the slides and put my speakers notes alongside them, so hopefully it will make sense.

For a another post on the modern degeneration of storytelling, and in particular our ‘And I was Like..’ culture, click here.